Religion

[FierceDeity]

My observation is that he can't look past what he's been told about Christianity and he doesn't realize it. What is that called again???

I can remember when you couldn't look past what you knew about a certain something too *cough*

Oh look here, trying to escalate it with a personal attack, huh?

Can't we just agree that everything in this exchange was unnecessarily inflammatory?

[MaestroUGC]

Tread lightly, people.

[FireArrow]

No, he's saying like...

All men are people, but not all people are men

That's exactly the point. All religions are a relationship with god, the difference between religions is the means of acquiring said relationship. This is not what MLF meant in his post.

[Olimar12345]

[Dude]

Is it time to start shitposting? Oh boy!

[FierceDeity]

I think what olimar is trying to say is:

LET US END THIS CEASELESS DEBATE, LEST IT FURTHER TEAR US APART AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE ONE TRUE GOD

LET US PRAY

FOREMAN, WHO ART IN TEXAS
HALLOWED BE THY GRILL
THY T-BONES COME, NOT QUITE WELL-DONE,
ON EARTH AS THEY ARE IN HEAVEN
GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY STEAK,
AND FORGIVE US OUR BURNT MEALS, AS WE FORGIVE THOSE WHO BURN MEALS AGAINST US
AND LEAD US NOT INTO FROZEN MEALS, BUT DELIVER US FROM BLANDNESS
FOR YOURS IS THE COOKOUT, AND THE SWAPPABLE GRILL PLATES, AND THE FAT-REDUCING MODEL FOREVER
AMEN

[Dude]

Minion miku > George Foreman

[Ruto]

Is there anything Miku hasn't been turned into? I like the sakura one nendoroid but I doubt I'll ever get it at a good price because of fanboys.

You do know the Torah is the Old Testament right? And the stuff that predates the Bible is probably crap that false teachers wrote back in the day. Haven't you noticed that ever since the beginning people have always been trying to cover up the Bible and get rid of it? The Bible has stood the test of time and isn't going anywhere.


And for the record, there is a 5th gospel that never made it to the Bible (one written by Judas Iscariot) that tells lies about Jesus and says a lot of crap.
I heard this somewhere I don't think it's a reliable source though

Can't we just agree that everything in this exchange was unnecessarily inflammatory?

Point.

That and a lot of previous ones, so don't make it sound like I'm the one feeding the flames. I think it starts when dirt from some previous topic that has nothing to do with this one is brought in just to start a fuss.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

I prefer the philosophy that God is a fourth dimensional being of sorts who exists beyond our narrow concept of reality. As an extension of that I have no issue with the idea that he made the universe. That said, and if that is the case, then it's doubtful he has a vested interest in anything happening on this little rock we call Earth.

Think about it, the universe is over 13 billion years old, yet the average human won't even live a full hundred years. God, by necessity of most definitions of an omnipotent God, would have to exist beyond our concept of time and relate more to the time scale of the whole universe. Since we cannot readily percieve such a vast stretch of time, let's condense the entire history of the universe into a single year, the Cosmic Calendar. If the Big Bang is the first second of Jan 1st, then the first humans (as in the first ones to use tools) came into being Dec 22, 22:24. To put that into closer context, the US has barely been around for a second. The average human life lasts for 1/4 of a second. That's less than the time it takes to blink.

Secondly, we're all on a rock circling an average star, in a typical galaxy, adrift in a seemingly infinite sea of other galaxies we call the Observable Universe. On top of that we only exist for a fraction of a second, and we're not even the most populous life form on the planet. If God is out there watching, none of us are around long enough for him to notice. On top of that, if he is omnipotent, why would he even begin to care about what we do? The Universe may very well be infinite, yet he chooses some random rock to focus on?

He may have designed and created the universe, but why would you mess with a well designed machine when there's nothing wrong with it? There is a great order to the universe that we are slowly starting to understand, and if there us a God he will reveal himself in the math and science that governs our universe.

It's a nice comfort thinking there's something out there watching over us, and there may very be. But our existence is so brief and feeble that it begs the question why something like God would even care? So he can judge us and take us to Heaven? I mean life here could be paradise, but there are so many conflicting world views that it renders that very improbable when factoring in the nature of human reasoning and perception. So he's just there to offer a reward for being good people? If that's the case then what's the point of even making the universe? If the universe has an ultimate fate, that he would know since he's omnipotent, then it makes the whole idea of Heaven flawed as it's fundamentally preordained who goes to heaven. And if that's the case then it's not a reward, it's a pending payment for just existing.

And if that's the case it renders the need for a system of faith, especially ones where such a thing is not only promised but a core center if belief, not only meaningless in how they go about it, but utterly irrelevant in terms of which one is "correct". At the end of the day I do believe in the possibility of God as the grand Architect or Engineer of this universe, but thats about it.

This wraps up this edition of Maestro Philosophy^TM

I like this thought, but it begs the question- why the God of Catholicism? Why not Allah, or Brahmin, or any God of any religion throughout history?
I'd be interested to hear your take.

[MaestroUGC]

The entire idea is that it's irrelevent. Said God has no bearing on a faith system, or rather the system of religion is fundamentally irrelevant to said existence of a God.

[FierceDeity]

That and a lot of previous ones, so don't make it sound like I'm the one feeding the flames. I think it starts when dirt from some previous topic that has nothing to do with this one is brought in just to start a fuss.

You're missing the point. If one's to claim the moral high ground, a personal attack of any kind is unacceptable. It's not constructive to the argument in any way, shape, or form, so I can't imagine any morally sound reason to do so, regardless of how much better or worse his response may have been.

[Pianist Da Sootopolis]

The entire idea is that it's irrelevent. Said God has no bearing on a faith system, or rather the system of religion is fundamentally irrelevant to said existence of a God.

So wouldn't you fit more under the label of a Deist than a Roman Catholic?

[MaestroUGC]

In a sense, but I haven't considered myself Catholic for years. Besides, nothing in my above philosophy indicated or was based on a single religion's view of God.

Actually, I'd call myself more Unconcerned than Deist. God's existence has no bearing on mine.

[Olimar12345]

FIERCEDEITY HAS EARNED HIS SALVATION. LET THIS WRATH COME MERCELESSLY UPON THE REST OF YOU:

[Ruto]

The entire idea is that it's irrelevent. Said God has no bearing on a faith system, or rather the system of religion is fundamentally irrelevant to said existence of a God.

God is pretty challenging to talk about in a room full of college students, even...The epistemology professor/priest just sums it up with "that which has no first cause" which is what you're saying as well? That would be the logic approach to the question. Notice the lack of gender pronouns in that description...

Futurama again, yahh. ("Who built you?" "I have always been.")

@FD
I'm not claiming a moral high ground. I'm pointing out how there are actually ways you can debate and discuss, than to insult a bunch of religions and claim a single answer (how is it debating if you walk into a room and think you're right?)